I left Detroit (where I was born) in 1972, and have lived in England ever since. Somebody please explain-- what on earth happened to that lovely city? Now it looks like a ghost town. Did I miss a meteor strike, and if so, when did it happen?

Well, let's see. First the earth cooled. And then the dinosaurs came, but they got too big and fat, so they all died and they turned into oil. And then the Arabs came and they bought Mercedes Benzes. And Prince Charles started wearing all of Lady Di's clothes. I couldn't believe it.

Detroit never really "shrunk", the wealth just began to spread away from the city center (the regional population now is practically the same it was in 1972).

MacknwarrenMemberUsername: Macknwarren

Post Number: 98Registered: 10-2007

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 11:41 am:

Gsgeorge: You are kidding, right, that Detroit is a better place to live in 2009 than in 1972? If you're serious, I'd truly like to hear some of your reasoning.

IslandmanMemberUsername: Islandman

Post Number: 1826Registered: 08-2004

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 11:44 am:

I'd like to hear that as well.

TetsuaMemberUsername: Tetsua

Post Number: 1531Registered: 01-2004

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 11:47 am:

I'll add to the list ...

* insufficient planning for the city / region. * Continual infighting between the city politicians * The educated leaving the city / region * DPS * Poor city services driving some to the suburbs * Less need for the manufacturing industry * Coleman A Young * Kwame

VasMemberUsername: Vas

Post Number: 461Registered: 01-2004

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 11:52 am:

spoiled millionaire athletes! haaaaa weird.

I don't know ask the baby boomers and their parents. They would know why so much division was created here. We just have to deal with it.

PamMemberUsername: Pam

Post Number: 4865Registered: 11-2005

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 12:02 pm:

quote:

left Detroit (where I was born) in 1972, and have lived in England ever since. Somebody please explain-- what on earth happened to that lovely city? Now it looks like a ghost town

Have you been back since then? If not, what are you basing the "ghost town" comment on? Why don't you come and see for yourself? It's not all bad news.

Newport1128MemberUsername: Newport1128

Post Number: 259Registered: 05-2007

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 12:06 pm:

A few more: * Criminals (both organized and the neighborhood variety)scaring away decent people * Drug importers, dealers, and their customers * Apathetic/non-existent parenting * Glorification of the thug "lifestyle"

JcoleMemberUsername: Jcole

Post Number: 5548Registered: 04-2005

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 12:16 pm:

If Mungalo has viewed that 'wonderful' movie that's linked on another thread, I can understand why he thinks it's a ghost town. There are also numerous other photo essays linked that show Detroit with no traffic and only abandoned buildings, not to mention wildlife and farm animals. All of that gives an impression of 'ghost town'.

#1 - The loss of easily attainable manufacturing jobs. This happened right around the time you left. Although there are a lot of other factors in the city's decline, pretty much everything else flows from that.

Other cities had drugs, crime, violence, racial divisiveness, real estate blockbusting, white flight, population and housing loss, loss of businesses, municipal corruption, poor education, ghettoization, suburbanization, and economic decline. But all of these problems were exacerbated in Detroit because of the working class, one industry character of the place, and the loss of most of our well-paying jobs. Very hard to pull a place up when it has essentially no economy.

However, for anyone who remembers the outright racial nastiness, post-riot fear, rampant police brutality, violent heroin-driven crime wave, and run away inflation of the '70s, this is in many ways a better time in the city. Or at least it was, until the latest economic downturn.

okay everybody, calm down. Yes, I bailed out in 72, but only because Detroit was a provincial city, not a dying one! Thanks for the links to help me piece together the intervening years. But why blow up all the beautiful architecture? Europeans are envious of all that empty space, and the two world wars destroyed any early 20c buildings we had over here. What are Detroiters going to do with all that space?

Eric_cMemberUsername: Eric_c

Post Number: 705Registered: 11-2003

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 5:59 pm:

"What are Detroiters going to do with all that space?"

------------------------------ -------------------

Make more.

JamsMemberUsername: Jams

Post Number: 7592Registered: 10-2003

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 6:04 pm:

Ray1936MemberUsername: Ray1936

Post Number: 3819Registered: 01-2005

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 6:25 pm:

Good lists from many of you. I'd just add Dutch Elm disease and the Ash borer.

PamMemberUsername: Pam

Post Number: 4868Registered: 11-2005

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 6:53 pm:

quote:

But why blow up all the beautiful architecture?

It hasn't all been "blown up". Again, why don't you visit and see for yourself? Take a tour with Preservation Wayne.

Detroit never really "shrunk", the wealth just began to spread away from the city center (the regional population now is practically the same it was in 1972)."

and of course Detroitrise is right!

So what does one do? There are some basic steps that could make a huge impact but won't happen because of leadership: 1) Create "East Park" This will be the area that 100 houses sit on between the near East Side and the GP Border above Jeff. Anyone with ownership docs. for a house or other property will be required to show valid proof of ownership within 60 days of notice and then they will be given new property in the near ring of the CBD, midtown or some other significantly populated area (their choice if its available). The land will be taken over by emminent domain, cleared and turned into a park. This becomes the outer buffer zone ready for expansion when Detroit can grow again. 2) Repeat above in all other similar areas of the city. 3) DPS. Shut down, property sold and vouchers handed to all 4) All city services (cops, plowing, street lights, etc) are now realistically redeployed based on the population centers 5) Aggressive procurement of funds from the Feds to pay for disaster relief ala New Orleans (Its our turn. The most New Orleans ever gave this country was a hangover. Detroit only saved this joint through 4-5 wars). 6) Tax cuts and business friendly "Brooks-like" policies that will attract busines to the city. 7) A focus on the strength of a multi-cultural city vs. the guilt-required celebration of a "black city" (that model hasn't worked out so well).

That should do it. Sit back and watch the city bloom!

NdaviesMemberUsername: Ndavies

Post Number: 1647Registered: 10-2003

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 7:01 pm:

quote:

Yes, I bailed out in 72, but only because Detroit was a provincial city, not a dying one!

Well, 800,000 other people also left for much the same reason you did. The city didn't match up with their expectations. Whatever those expectations might be. When you lose 50% of your population because Detroit was such a provincial city, the city eventually dies.

NdaviesMemberUsername: Ndavies

Post Number: 1649Registered: 10-2003

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 7:06 pm:

quote:

Yes, I bailed out in 72, but only because Detroit was a provincial city, not a dying one!

Well, 800,000 other people also left for much the same reason you did. The city didn't match up with their expectations. Whatever those expectations might be. When you lose 50% of your population because Detroit was such a provincial city, the city eventually dies. Their reason for leaving is just as valid as yours.

IheartthedMemberUsername: Iheartthed

Post Number: 3686Registered: 04-2006

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 7:20 pm:

"I'll hit ya when I wanna, BAM!... When I wanna... BAM!... When I wanna..."

Mungalo, have you had your head up the Queen's butt for the last 37 years? You're just finding out that Detroit has been in decline NOW? No contact with former friends, no curiosity for the last 37 years about your former place of residence?

Jaysus, read a newspaper once in a while.

Alan55MemberUsername: Alan55

Post Number: 2536Registered: 09-2005

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 7:38 pm:

Mungalo, have you had your head up the Queen's butt for the last 37 years? You're just finding out that Detroit has been in decline NOW? No contact with former friends, no curiosity for the last 37 years about your former place of residence?

Jaysus, read a newspaper once in a while.

NdaviesMemberUsername: Ndavies

Post Number: 1650Registered: 10-2003

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 7:42 pm:

I feel a crash coming........

The forum software is acting up. I keep getting errors when I post. I didn't know they went through. It now won't let me erase them.

You got some excellent reasons for the economic decline of Detroit. Ghost town, no way.

Still have life left in the old girl. Come back for a visit and you'll meet plenty of good people, great cultural institutions and a good time.

There are still people here looking for solutions. Tired of making apologies. Detroit in the future will not look the Detroit of the past. That is real.

I could wax nostalgic over the late great Detroit. Old enough to remember but young enough to want to effect real change. So many people on this forum left and/or never lived here. I am here and hope to make a difference along with other folk. The bitter attitudes expressed here leave me a little blank.

SoftailriderMemberUsername: Softailrider

Post Number: 259Registered: 02-2007

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 9:44 pm:

I think the city was in definite decline by 1972, I remember growing up in Detroit in the late 50's - early 60's and it was a vibrant place to live. My northwest side neighborhood was a fantastic place to live.Then, the middle class tax base left in droves after the riot, neighborhoods declined very badly, city services went to hell completely.It became an unlivable place

ChuckjavMemberUsername: Chuckjav

Post Number: 1483Registered: 09-2007

Posted on Friday, January 16, 2009 - 10:30 pm:

My three-cents on the subject....

HATE, FEAR and ABANDONMENT - with great depth & breadth - is what happened to Detroit; you can't know -or-understand what I mean, without talking to parents & grandparents.

It takes time to rebound from such a thing; time enough for all that remember....to pass.

Tragically Undeniable

IheartthedMemberUsername: Iheartthed

Post Number: 3687Registered: 04-2006

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 12:38 am:

>It became an unlivable place

Yet, 900,000 people somehow manage to do so.

ThecarlMemberUsername: Thecarl

Post Number: 886Registered: 04-2005

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 12:44 am:

quote:

Yet, 900,000 people somehow manage to do so.

"manage"

TownonenorthMemberUsername: Townonenorth

Post Number: 714Registered: 10-2007

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 1:42 pm:

quote:

I work for a major transportaion company that is supportive of mass transit.

Who DO you work for?

(Message edited by townonenorth on January 17, 2009)

TrainmanMemberUsername: Trainman

Post Number: 711Registered: 04-2006

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 4:58 pm:

My username should make it obvious that I work for a railroad. We support Amtrak and the need for good connecting bus routes to get more train passengers.

You see, that's why I'm against more freeways. Railroads can be used to remove trucks from freeways and buses can remove cars from freeways. Freeways are too crowded and this makes them dangerous. I don't think the SEMCOG plans are a good idea, thus I leave comments to them but my comments are ignored, thus, I'm seeking the public to defeat tax proposals such as the SMART property tax renewal that do not take notice of the need to remove cars from our raods and to increase train passenger service.

I want to help SMART by getting them MDOT support to remove cars from freeways because this must be done or we will not be able to compete for good paying jobs in southeast Michigan based on many facts. This is confusing since I want to defeat their tax but unless they remove cars from the roads then they don't really deserve anymore tax money. The SMART leaders should be mass transit advocates but they are not at this time because they are not working for more federal, state and industry support. They are presently content with the charity approach of helping the handicapped and the elderly with local taxes. In my opinion, they can do better then this.

(Message edited by Trainman on January 17, 2009)

TownonenorthMemberUsername: Townonenorth

Post Number: 716Registered: 10-2007

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 6:17 pm:

quote:

Railroads can be used to remove trucks from freeways and buses can remove cars from freeways. Freeways are too crowded and this makes them dangerous.

Certainly railroads can be used in the methods you describe, but reality proves otherwise.

While for the long term haul railroads replace trucks, short haul within a state requires trucks to move from place to place economically. Not every industrial or retail site has a train siding behind the building for loading and unloading.

You also have intermodal transport. The trailers come off of the trains and are transported... by truck.

Upgrading the bus system is great. Cutting the funding off at the knees makes no sense at all. Rejecting the SMART renewal affects MDOT in what way?

TrainmanMemberUsername: Trainman

Post Number: 714Registered: 04-2006

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 7:51 pm:

The loss of public bus service in Livonia was directly as a result of cuts in revenue sharing from MDOT. This is well documented by the Citizens Research Council and the Federal Transit Database.

You are right about Railroads not replacing trucks but more can be done to unclog the freeways. Other areas are successfully moving cars and trucks off roads, thus we can too.

The 2 Billion dollar plan to add 25 miles of new freeway lanes in Detroit and Oakland County have been approved by both the federal and state governments. Should the SMART tax fail then MDOT and SEMCOG would have to make their massive plans public and then they could be defeated or changed. You see, this would increase mass transit funding and not cut it off at the knees as many people believe.

It makes no sense to expand the suburbs with larger freeways when the city of Detroit needs more tax dollars and industries. There is evidence that 2 Billion dollars can build a decent public light rail and bus system with affordable operating costs. So, what do you want next August 2010? YES for the freeways. NO, to get MDOT to pay for a decent public mass transit first before or if the freeways get built.

It’s up to you how you vote and certainly helping SMART is a good cause, Townonenorth. So, thanks a lot for your post and concern about the needs of the elderly and handicapped citizens.

TownonenorthMemberUsername: Townonenorth

Post Number: 718Registered: 10-2007

Posted on Saturday, January 17, 2009 - 9:33 pm:

quote:

The loss of public bus service in Livonia was directly as a result of cuts in revenue sharing from MDOT. This is well documented by the Citizens Research Council and the Federal Transit Database

Hmm. Seems to me that this is not the case. I'd like to see links to the CRC and the FTD reports mentioned above in respects to this. Here's a report on Livonia and SMART from WDET.

The funding for the SMART Middlebelt 285 public bus line came from the Michigan Transportation Fund, when it was shut down in November 2006.

See the references in the report titled “The abolition of state revenue sharing for mass transit in Michigan” Click on “The SMART Millage Vote”. The Federal Transit Database is public in Google search engines.

SMART has lost over $32 Million dollars per year in operating assistance from the Michigan Department of Transportation since 1995, which was used for revenue sharing between communities for line bus routes, community transit, the elderly and the low-income.

A vote of NO will not harm SMART next August 2010 because of disability and civil rights laws that require our state and local governments to pay for the basic necessities of those unable to provide for themselves and/or are presently served by SMART but are low-income.

Thanks for the attachment but it is full of false propagandas, SMART and transit tax advocates downplay the cuts in state funding because they want matching grants for new street cars and rail service and they compete with the road lobbyists for funding from the fuel tax. In addition, there is much industry support for public bus service that is neglected or goes unnoticed because of political forces that prohibit good use of limited tax dollars.

For those want to know about the SMART tax, see Trainman’s Save the.. in DETROIT LINKS

TownonenorthMemberUsername: Townonenorth

Post Number: 709Registered: 10-2007

Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2009 - 6:55 pm:

Honestly, Trainman... The state doesn't have enough money now to give cities enough money to cover their revenue sharing. Why do you think that reduction in services are the norm in local governments now? 1995 was a whole lifetime ago in the fiscal health of this State.

Voting NO would place SMART in competition with basic services in our state. Local Police and Fire funding comes indirectly from the Revenue Sharing funds, through local government. I'd choose the police and fire before funding a bus line, if it came to that.

TrainmanMemberUsername: Trainman

Post Number: 702Registered: 04-2006

Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2009 - 10:28 pm:

Quote

I'd choose the police and fire before funding a bus line, if it came to that.

End of Quote.

That IS exactly why SMART is no longer in Livonia.

(Message edited by Trainman on January 19, 2009)

DetroitriseMemberUsername: Detroitrise

Post Number: 3731Registered: 09-2007

Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2009 - 10:39 pm:

Maybe it's just me, but I blame the human race and society for Detroit's demise.

TownonenorthMemberUsername: Townonenorth

Post Number: 714Registered: 10-2007

Posted on Sunday, January 18, 2009 - 11:28 pm:

It's their choice. When they decided to opt out, why should anyone have to make up the difference, which you are asking me to do. The system works for all now, why upset the apple cart to get this bus back? Perhaps you should talk to the people of Livonia to change their position?

Chuck_gMemberUsername: Chuck_g

Post Number: 18Registered: 01-2009

Posted on Monday, January 19, 2009 - 12:31 am:

Blame what you may for Detroit's demise, but on average, we're a society that likes new over old. Detroit is old. People left the old for the new and as time wore on, those that stayed were less and less able to sustain the expensive cost of maintenance.

I liken Detroit to an old car. Sometimes it's cheaper to buy new than keep fixing the old and people will go for cheaper.

As for me, I have no roots in Detroit proper, but I mourn the loss of the history and vitality, as I'm sure do you all.

LombaowskiMemberUsername: Lombaowski

Post Number: 129Registered: 11-2004

Posted on Monday, January 19, 2009 - 2:04 am:

I liked gsgeorge's answer.

LilpupMemberUsername: Lilpup

Post Number: 5125Registered: 06-2004

Posted on Monday, January 19, 2009 - 4:39 am:

Sometimes I think Detroit has become the most emotionally abusive place in the country. When we're not beating up ourselves or each other we let outsiders come in and do it.